AMD Radeon Vega 3 versus NVIDIA GeForce 840M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Vega 3 and NVIDIA GeForce 840M pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Mémoire, Soutien API, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Vega 3
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 ans 11 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 2.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 33 Watt
- 2.1x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 306 versus 149
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 183.156 versus 162.594
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 13 February 2018 versus 12 March 2014 |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 33 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 306 versus 149 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 183.156 versus 162.594 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce 840M
- 3.4x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1029 MHz versus 300 MHz
- Environ 12% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1124 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- Environ 50% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 17.98 GTexel / s versus 12 GTexel / s
- 2x plus de pipelines: 384 versus 192
- 2.2x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 863.2 gflops versus 384.0 gflops
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1088 versus 890
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 5630 versus 3932
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 22.848 versus 10.049
- Environ 65% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.237 versus 0.75
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 21.15 versus 18.933
- Environ 59% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 95.545 versus 60.006
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2085 versus 1412
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2736 versus 2111
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3191 versus 3174
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2085 versus 1412
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2736 versus 2111
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3191 versus 3174
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 503 versus 418
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz versus 300 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1124 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 17.98 GTexel / s versus 12 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 384 versus 192 |
Performance á point flottant | 863.2 gflops versus 384.0 gflops |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1088 versus 890 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5630 versus 3932 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 22.848 versus 10.049 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.237 versus 0.75 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.15 versus 18.933 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 95.545 versus 60.006 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2085 versus 1412 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2736 versus 2111 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3191 versus 3174 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2085 versus 1412 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2736 versus 2111 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3191 versus 3174 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 503 versus 418 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Vega 3
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 840M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Nom | AMD Radeon Vega 3 | NVIDIA GeForce 840M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 890 | 1088 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 306 | 149 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3932 | 5630 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 10.049 | 22.848 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 183.156 | 162.594 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.75 | 1.237 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 18.933 | 21.15 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 60.006 | 95.545 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1412 | 2085 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2111 | 2736 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3174 | 3191 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1412 | 2085 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2111 | 2736 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3174 | 3191 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 418 | 503 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon Vega 3 | NVIDIA GeForce 840M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Maxwell |
Nom de code | Owl | GM108 |
Date de sortie | 13 February 2018 | 12 March 2014 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1264 | 1268 |
Genre | Desktop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1000 MHz | 1124 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 1029 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 384.0 gflops | 863.2 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 192 | 384 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 12 GTexel / s | 17.98 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 33 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 4,940 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Mémoire |
||
Genre de mémoire | System Shared | DDR3 |
RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 16.02 GB / s | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 2002 MHz | |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | |
Technologies |
||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus |